Suchergebnisse

It has often been assumed that people with developmental disabilities are incapable of expressing or acquiring the level of emotional insight necessary to engage in any kind of therapy. This book explodes this myth, challenging mental health professionals and families to engage in genuine dialogue with people who are developmentally disabled

It has often been assumed that people with developmental disabilities are incapable of expressing or acquiring the level of emotional insight and sensitivity necessary to engage in any kind of therapy. Authentic Dialogue with Persons who are Developmentally Disabled explodes this myth, challenging mental health professionals and families to engage in genuine dialogue with people who are developmentally disabled. Rather than avoiding painful topics, such as awareness of the loss of a normal life, this book shows it is possible to confront these difficult and emotive issues within a therapeutic

Agricultural guest workers have organized in recent years, but building viable unions to represent guest workers is challenging. To effectively represent guest workers, a union must address problems throughout the work cycle in both home and host countries. The Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC) is one union that has organized guest-worker units in recent years. FLOC is experimenting with outreach, education, and representation activities in Mexico, the home country for members of their guest-worker bargaining unit. To be successful, FLOC and other guest-worker unions must use the advantages available in each country's legal and political regimes to advance the interests of its members. In Mexico, legal requirements for an employment relationship and restrictions on foreign union officials might stand in the way of union recognition. Neither is insuperable in principle, but they point to the legal and political minefield into which a guest-worker union might fall. Nevertheless, experiments aimed at developing new transnational forms and tools is a worthwhile venture because purely domestic forms of organization will not adequately serve workers in a world where both labor and capital cross borders.

This précis is from Research Paper #1/96, by Jennifer Hill, and published by the Australian Investment Managers' Association, 1996. It supplements, as a matter of record, the conclusions of the UK report of a study group chaired by Sir Richard Greenbury, and published in Corporate Governance – an international review.

Cover -- Contents -- Series Foreword -- 1 Culture Jamming and Other Ventures -- 2 The Children's Culture Industry -- 3 I Buy, Therefore I Am -- 4 For and Against the Child as a Consumer -- 5 Conformity, Creativity, and the Mechanisms of Persuasion -- 6 Democracy versus Consumer Capitalism -- 7 Deconstructing Consumerism: From the Voices of Young People -- 8 Primed to Consume -- Appendix: Interview Questionnaire -- Notes -- Index -- A -- B -- C -- D -- E -- F -- G -- H -- I -- J -- K -- L -- M -- N -- O -- P -- Q -- R -- S -- T -- U -- V -- W -- X -- Y -- Z -- About the Author -- About the Series Editor and Advisors.

The global financial crisis highlighted the interconnectedness of international financial markets and the risk of contagion it posed. The crisis also emphasized the importance of supranational regulation and regulatory cooperation to address that risk. Yet, although capital flows are global, securities regulation is not. As a 2019 report by IOSCO notes, the regulatory challenges revealed during the global financial crisis have by no means dissipated over the last decade. Lack of international standards, or differences in the way jurisdictions implement such standards, can often result in regulatory-driven market fragmentation. This article considers a range of cooperative techniques designed to achieve international regulatory harmonization and effective financial market supervision. It includes discussion of a high profile cross-border supervisory experiment, the 2008 US-Australian Mutual Recognition Agreement, which was the first agreement of its kind for the SEC. The article also examines some key regulatory developments in Australia and Asia since the time of the US-Australian Mutual Recognition Agreement.

Shareholder participation in corporate governance and investor activism are topics du jour in the United States and around the world. In the early part of the 20th century, Professors Berle and Means considered that shareholder participation was impossible in the transformed commercial world that they described in The Modern Corporation and Private Property. This was a world characterized by dispersed and vulnerable shareholders, in which owners do not manage, and managers do not own, the corporation. In such an environment, the goal of corporate law became one of protecting shareholder interests rather than providing shareholders with participation rights. The structure of capital markets and profile of shareholders in the United States today is dramatically different from that time. The rise of institutional investors challenged the idea that the only possible paradigm in corporate law is one of shareholder protection. Shareholder participation in corporate governance is not only feasible but a contemporary reality. As this Article demonstrates, however, there are competing narratives about shareholders and their right to participate in corporate governance around the world. Although a negative view underpins much recent debate in the United States, a diametrically opposite view of shareholder power and activism has gained traction in many jurisdictions outside the United States. This Article focuses on one manifestation of this positive view of shareholders, namely shareholder stewardship codes, which originated in the United Kingdom following the 2007–2008 global financial crisis and are now proliferating throughout the world. These competing narratives concerning the role of shareholders in corporate governance have significant regulatory implications. In particular, the narratives pose challenges to regulators, who attempt to differentiate between "good activists" and "bad activists."